Getty Can this recent free-agent addition live up to expectations in Andy Reid's system?
We all know by now that the Kansas City Chiefs elected to make a franchise-altering decision when they traded Tyreek Hill.
Head coach Andy Reid addressed that choice head-on at the annual NFL owners’ meeting and now the next steps are clear — how can GM Brett Veach and Reid go about turning all that new money and draft capital into an improved roster? Meaning, can they reinvent themselves better than they ever were before Hill’s departure?
That’s the big question Chiefs Kingdom is facing right now and one of the first acquisitions post-trade is already under fire.
ALL the latest Chiefs news straight to your inbox! Join the Heavy on Chiefs newsletter here!
Bleacher Report Criticizes ‘MVS’ Deal
On March 24, the Chiefs announced they would be signing former Green Bay Packers wide receiver Marquez Valdes-Scantling on a three-year deal. The contract could payout up to $30 million but according to Over the Cap, only $8.56 million is guaranteed.
Bleacher Report’s Alex Kay was not crazy about this move, listing ‘MVS’ as the Chiefs’ worst free-agent signing of the 2022 offseason so far. Kay wrote:
The NFL analyst concluded: “He’ll make a few plays and scores some touchdowns, but Valdes-Scantling is not going to get enough volume to make a real difference during his three-year, $30 million deal.”
Follow the Heavy on Chiefs Facebook page, where you can weigh in on all the latest KC-related daily content, analysis, features and more!
The Work Is Far From Done at WR
If you look at the Valdes-Scantling addition — or Smith-Schuster for that matter — as a direct replacement for Hill, of course these players are going to fall short. When you factor in the guaranteed money given to each, however, there’s another way to look at these signings.
It’s fair to reason that MVS and Smith-Schuster are the revamped depth in this sparkly new wide receiver core, which means the WR1 of the future is still on the way. Keep in mind that Demarcus Robinson and Byron Pringle needed to be accounted for as well. The ex-Steeler and Packer are more comparable as clear upgrades on those two.
That’s the magic of perspective and while Kay is judging Kansas City based on what they have physically done so far — which is fair — a fan is always allowed to speculate on what their team might still accomplish in the future.
After the Valdes-Scantling pickup, NFL insider Jordan Schultz tweeted: “Even after acquiring MVS, make no mistake; #Chiefs not done replenishing WR room – via trade, FA or draft. I mentioned [their] excitement about Skyy Moore yesterday… I’m told Jahan Dotson, Treylon Burks, David Bell and Christian Watson all have big fans inside the KC building.”
I’d focus your sights on a veteran trade or a draft pick for now, since the free-agent market is somewhat barren at the position.
Looking toward late April, the Chiefs have two first-round picks to work with and even if they drop one to the second round, there are plenty of talented wide receivers that should be on the board in that 29-40 range. Veach could also trade up to land a premier talent at the position if that’s his preference.
Some interesting names to keep an eye on, whether in the first or second round, could be the following (Schultz mentioned a few): Jameson Williams, Chris Olave, Burks, Dotson, George Pickens, Moore, Watson, Jalen Tolbert, and Bell among others.
Again, it is a very deep wide receiver class and Veach is far from finished.
The article is WRONG..The Chiefs need to lose cap space and get a Safety and a cheap young new WR in the draft,.They didn’t WANT to let Hill go but they already have Mahomes getting $40 mil a yr and Kelce is going to have to get paid soon and it goes on and on,.Someone has to go,.Just an irresponsible article to ANYONE who understands common NFL situations,.Who writes this garbage?
Hey Matt, I think you are misinterpreting which parts are quotes and which parts are written by us. We agree with all of your points, as stated in the introduction and the bottom half of the article. The block quote/opinion is from Bleacher Report, as stated within (not our opinion). The purpose of this article was to refute that opinion from B/R, which we did in the second half. Thanks for reading!